You bring up a good point, Tdog, and that's Justin Upton. After endless trade speculation surrounding him and doubts about his...will to win (I'm already starting to sour on this idea), he was traded to the Braves this year and he's done nothing but rub it in Kevin Towers face so far.

Of course it is a long season, and not much of it has been played so far, but still we can't just say (like Hawk is doing) that TWTW is the ultimate factor in a players success. I'm starting to think Hawk doesn't even believe that himself and he's kinda pulling a Dubya by ramping up the hucksterism because it goes along with his personality and because some people still eat it up (and he knows it).

I don't think Hawk is right or wrong here. It's all a matter of what mindset you're most willing to accept. Even for a younger fan, I find some of these expanded forms of stats confusing at times. I'm sure if I set aside the proper time, I'd understand them all as well as anyone. Us fans can believe what we want, but it would be best for every team to use it regardless. This is what baseball's future is no matter how much we try to fight it.

I don't think Hawk is right or wrong here. It's all a matter of what mindset you're most willing to accept. Even for a younger fan, I find some of these expanded forms of stats confusing at times. I'm sure if I set aside the proper time, I'd understand them all as well as anyone. Us fans can believe what we want, but it would be best for every team to use it regardless. This is what baseball's future is no matter how much we try to fight it.

To create an ad campaign around ideas of your dip**** announcer is awful.

I don't think Hawk is right or wrong here. It's all a matter of what mindset you're most willing to accept. Even for a younger fan, I find some of these expanded forms of stats confusing at times. I'm sure if I set aside the proper time, I'd understand them all as well as anyone. Us fans can believe what we want, but it would be best for every team to use it regardless. This is what baseball's future is no matter how much we try to fight it.

No he's wrong. To be as far to the extreme that he is on this debate, he's wrong. Just like everyone else, on both sides of this argument, that are to that kind of extreme. And that's the problem I have with Hawk over everything else as a baseball announcer. It's not his stupid sayings or nicknames or bias or moments of silence when the Sox do something bad. It's that he is flat out wrong about baseball quite often. On a daily basis.

As a play by play guy, that should be seen as unacceptable by your employers. Especially by employers that, at least some degree like just about every other MLB team, use the kind of sabermetrics in their decision making that he decries as bull****.

No he's wrong. To be as far to the extreme that he is on this debate, he's wrong. Just like everyone else, on both sides of this argument, that are to that kind of extreme. And that's the problem I have with Hawk over everything else as a baseball announcer. It's not his stupid sayings or nicknames or bias or moments of silence when the Sox do something bad. It's that he is flat out wrong about baseball quite often. On a daily basis.

As a play by play guy, that should be seen as unacceptable by your employers. Especially by employers that, at least some degree like just about every other MLB team, use the kind of sabermetrics in their decision making that he decries as bull****.

When it comes to credibility as far as announcers go I'm going to believe the guy that batted behind a Triple Crown winner, was an all star (before fans voted), and finished 3rd in MVP voting in 1968 over a guy who never picked up a bat but has a good voice.

Hawk does know baseball but he isn't willing to consider sabermetrics because he is still stuck in a different era of baseball. I think its okay and actually refreshing.

As far as marketing TWTW i think it is genius. Controversy creates cash and up until now this has been a bland team. This will give it some personality and an attitude from a marketing perspective.

When it comes to credibility as far as announcers go I'm going to believe the guy that batted behind a Triple Crown winner, was an all star (before fans voted), and finished 3rd in MVP voting in 1968 over a guy who never picked up a bat but has a good voice.

Hawk does know baseball but he isn't willing to consider sabermetrics because he is still stuck in a different era of baseball. I think its okay and actually refreshing.

As far as marketing TWTW i think it is genius. Controversy creates cash and up until now this has been a bland team. This will give it some personality and an attitude from a marketing perspective.

When it comes to credibility as far as announcers go I'm going to believe the guy that batted behind a Triple Crown winner, was an all star (before fans voted), and finished 3rd in MVP voting in 1968 over a guy who never picked up a bat but has a good voice.

Hawk does know baseball but he isn't willing to consider sabermetrics because he is still stuck in a different era of baseball. I think its okay and actually refreshing.

Well that's your loss then. Plenty of good analysts/writers out there covering every sport that haven't ever played in the big leagues in any of them. I don't use the word "hate" often but I hate this idea where if you didn't make it to the big time, there's no way your word is more credible than someone who did or you are less "worthy" or "deserving" to comment on that particular sport. There are tons of ex-athletes that are just bad when it comes to actually having to analyze their sport or talk about it or have a hand in running it. Tons of examples. Too many to list.

Also, how being stuck in the past is considered "refreshing" is beyond me.

I watched about five minutes of that before I had to turn it off. Strangely, I thought that Hawk did better than I thought he would. I think he was wrong but for all the right reasons. His points about Harold Reynolds and the little things that a guy can do in a game (such as turning the double play quickly or snaring a grounder that at least keeps a guy from going to first to third) is absolutely correct. I also think he's right when he calls Brian Kenny out on bunting by pointing out that every game and every at bat is different, however that whole WTW or whatever the hell it is is such a load of bull****. EVERY one wants to win, that's how you get to the majors.

It would have been interesting to hear Steve Stone in that segment, he seems to take that balanced approach to sabermetrics and the intangibles.

Well that's your loss then. Plenty of good analysts/writers out there covering every sport that haven't ever played in the big leagues in any of them. I don't use the word "hate" often but I hate this idea where if you didn't make it to the big time, there's no way your word is more credible than someone who did or you are less "worthy" or "deserving" to comment on that particular sport. There are tons of ex-athletes that are just bad when it comes to actually having to analyze their sport or talk about it or have a hand in running it. Tons of examples. Too many to list.

Also, how being stuck in the past is considered "refreshing" is beyond me.

A-****ing-men on all points. I HATE the "those who played the game automatically have more credibility" argument.

And being stuck in the past is not a good thing.

__________________
Ridiculousness across all sports:

(1) "You have no valid opinion because you never played the game."
(2) "Stats are irrelevant. This guy just doesn't know how to win."